cayenne-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrus Adamchik <and...@objectstyle.org>
Subject Re: Local Object
Date Fri, 09 Jul 2010 15:18:33 GMT
I am not comfortable with adding a new public ObjectContext method  
that will be hard to remove in the future. And I suspect it *will* be  
removed/renamed. I know this is bad situation, as likely it won't get  
implemented quickly (and most certainly not on 3.0 branch), and you  
would want to use it right away... Maybe for now you'll create your  
own utility or a DataContext subclass and we put the request in Jira?

Andrus


On Jul 9, 2010, at 6:01 PM, Michael Gentry wrote:
> Our particular use-case is pulling objects into a child DC to edit and
> isolate changes.  Something like:
>
> User localUser = childContext.localObject(user.getObjectId(), user);
>
> Just seems like that can be simplified a bit for the developers.
>
> Thanks,
>
> mrg
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Andrus Adamchik <andrus@objectstyle.org 
> > wrote:
>> Actually "localObject" is too loaded, performing a set of vaguely  
>> related
>> distinct tasks... It has to be split into multiple methods (and  
>> IIRC we
>> discussed it briefly some time ago). This particular variety is  
>> closer to
>> "merge", vs. "localObject(id, null)" which is something like  
>> "locate"...
>> Since this is rather visible public API and there are some caveats,  
>> we need
>> to give it some more thought I think, identifying all the scenarios  
>> before
>> creating appropriate methods.
>>
>> Andrus
>>
>>
>> On Jul 9, 2010, at 5:36 PM, Michael Gentry wrote:
>>
>>> Would it make sense to add:
>>>
>>> public Persistent localObject(Persistent source)
>>> {
>>>  return localObject(source.getObjectId(), source)
>>> }
>>>
>>> to DataContext and friends?  We are starting to use that a bit here
>>> and it seems like it would be much simpler to me.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> mrg
>>>
>>
>>
>


Mime
View raw message